The Osgood File. Sponsored by ________. This is Dave Ross. On the CBS Radio Network.

Hi, there, Dave...

Condoleezza Rice calls it an opportunity too good for them to pass up. She's talking about terrorists trying to influence the election here they way they presumably did in Spain.

I'd call it a certainty that they're going to try, going for the highest corpse count they can get. What do you think?

I'm not so sure America would react as Spain did - but I know this much. The fact that Dr. Rice is SAYING this means if something DOES happen 
 this time the Administration can't claim it didn't know.

That's pretty much beside the point when the streets are littered with American body parts, isn't it? Unless you consider other things more important...

More after this from Charlie:

Oh, Charlie wrote it, did he? And you're just today's parrot?

In a news interview, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice says there is a serious possibility that terrorists will try to disrupt the Presidential election, by taking the "wrong lesson from Spain" as she put it.

She's making the assumption that a sufficiently large majority of Americans aren't as cowardly as a sufficiently large majority of Spaniards are. She could be wrong, of course...

What happened in Spain, you'll recall, is that right after 191 people died in those terrorist train explosions, the voters kicked out the incumbent, in favor of a candidate who promised to take Spanish troops out of Iraq.

It's called "caving." The word "cojones" fell right out of the Spanish language. Now they have to refer to them as "los marshmallows."

So when Dr. Rice talks about terrorists disrupting the US election, she appears to be defining "disruption" as anything that would lead to people NOT voting for President Bush.

I think she's referring to body parts in the streets and a citizenry that whimpers and sez "Oh, who shall make peace with these people so they stop killing us?" That'd be a vote for Kerry, of course, 'cuz he was in Vietnam for four months and he's so European in his outlook and he has that expensive hair...

Presumably if terrorists were to strike, and President Bush WAS re-elected anyway, then the election would NOT have been disrupted.

Presumably, that statement makes sense. I just can't find it...

UNLESS
 unless the terrorists WANTED us to vote for Bush. See, that's the difficulty you have with terrorists. Basically, being Americans and being brave, we want to do whatever it is the terrorists DON'T want us to do. But before we can DEFY the terrorists, we have to know WHAT is it they DIDN'T want us to do. Now suppose the terrorists strike because they want us TO vote for Bush. Perhaps because they appreciate that he's kept so many Americans within mortar range in Iraq But in THAT case, the way to defy them would be to vote for Kerry.

Marvelous! Just the sort of argument that would occur to a sophomore! Why, it's nearly so stoopid it's beneath contempt. Kerry's the one who's said he'll abandon the War on Terror, Dave and Charlie. Not Bush. Kerry's the one who's assured the Iranians that he's going to patching things up with them. Kerry's the guy the North Koreans seem to favor, when they're not cooking up a sea of fire for us all.

I'll tell you what would REALLY screw the terrorists up - if we all just resolved right now that no matter what blows up, we're voting NADER.

Yeah! Huh huh! An' then we could all moon Bush, right Beavis?

The Osgood File. Dave Ross. On the CBS Radio Network.